guage, I urge you, against the unequivocal language and force of bills designed to repress and punish citizen unrest often arising from unequal opportunities and other fundamental inequities.

In studying bills S. 2806 from the administration and S. 2453, the former places reliance on the courts via the Justice Department to enforce equal employment opportunity under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This may be one important option needed by the EEOC in its resources to fully implement equal employment opportunity. To depend on this method alone for EEOC enforcement power might be utter folly and an outrageous insult to the intelligence particularly of those citizens still excluded from equal opportunity and for the following reasons:

1. Approximately only 1% (not 5-10-50) of the U.S. Justice Department's total budget is allocated to its Civil Rights Division although this division represents one of seven (not 1 of 100) major divisions of Justice. The Civil Rights Division itself has jurisdiction in eight principal areas, only one of which deals with employment cases under Title VII. Thus, it is conceivable that only th of 1%, and certainly less than 1%, of its funds are available for employment justice. Who can honestly claim satisfaction with putting all one's enforcement eggs in that basket?

2. Forty of the Justice Department's own 76 Civil Rights Attorneys have been meeting secretly to draw up grievances that reflect concern about this Administration's back-tracking on civil rights in the instance of school desegregation. This action has been mandated since 1954. One shudders at the inactivity of the Justice Department since 1964 on employment and indeed that inactivity is confirmed by the report of Richard Nathan of the Brookings Institution for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, dated April, 1969 and on page 76.

3. There are several other reasons for favoring S. 2453 over S. 2806, the most fundamental of which is: Bringing suit against recalcitrant employers is a timeconsuming, costly and awkward enforcement method that requires the EEOC to assemble witnesses and assume all the burden of proof even after probable cause has been established. No wonder aggrieved persons and groups feel little hope of redress. A cease and desist order, while not enough (as I shall detail shortly), does put an immediate stop to discrimination and puts the onus of litigation on the offending employer or contractor. I leave to your sense of real justice which has demonstrated more effective practice in producing equity.

4. In those instances where the Justice Department has acted for employment equity, not a single one of the 33 cases to date has been initiated in cases of sex discrimination, although sex discrimination has made up from 4 to of EEOC cases at any one time. While the symbol of justice may appear as a woman, the practice and concept of justice in the U.S. has seldom involved women themselves, women's real needs as persons, let alone their real definitions as persons entitled to full protection under all laws guaranteed to other U.S. citizens. In short, by systematic sexual inequity in law and practice, women have been and are today denied sexual equality so that gross and outrageous legislation without representation even seems natural and inevitable.

In brief, I am truly grieved that the EEOC Chairman was somehow persuaded to accept S. 2806 and that the protest of other EEOC members has not been more forceful and illuminating of S. 2806's real and present dangers.

S. 2453 is the more desirable of the bills for reasons I will detail and yet it, itself, is inadequate in the absence of necessary provisions which I will recommend. S. 2453 is desirable for the following reasons and I would urge retention of these provisions with extensions as noted:

1. Removal of the burden of enforcement from the complainant by providing authority to the EEOC to issue cease and desist orders and to enforce them through the courts. The EEOC needs, additionally, the authority to prosecute appeals to or from the Circuit Court of Appeals and discretion to proceed on its own or through the Justice Department. I recommend that S. 2453 be so amended. 2. Deletion of the exception for state and local governments from coverage of Federal Civil Rights Acts is good. The exemption of educational institutions from employment coverage is unthinkable, if we value at all the critical role of education in social change to promote human equality. In fact, I would specifically advocate inclusion of educational institutions and public employees in general and teachers and administrators in particular, in coverage under all civil rights legislation.

3. The expansion of coverage to employers of eight (as against the present 25) is desirable.

4. The transfers to the EEOC of enforcement of nondiscrimination in employment by government contractors and subcontractors from the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Federal Contract Compliance and from the Civil Service Commission authority to enforce nondiscrimination in Federal employment are important steps in the direction of better coordination and commitment to employment equity. I would additionally advocate transfer of administration of the Federal Women's Program to the EEOC. Steps to eliminate Social Security laws and practices that disadvantage working women should come under the jurisdiction of the EEOC.

Neither bill addresses itself to some serious situations I would like to see corrected by specific amendment to S. 2453. While S. 2453 represents some improvements, I would suggest that lines 11-22 on page 3 of this bill raise serious value questions. This part deals with violating confidentiality of EEOC information in processing complaints (after probable cause is established) and effecting conciliation. Now, as a State Commissioner, I am not unfamiliar with the rationale and value of confidentiality and do not oppose practical implementation of the same. I do protest the relative sanction of a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or imprisonment for not more than one year or both for revealing information about a violation and yet can only say (even if S. 2453 becomes law) to those who violate the law: "You must cease and desist." Does this mean that revealing data about a violation is indeed more serious than the act of violation? This Subcommittee might be well advised to reverse the negative sanctions for the respective behaviors from that now proposed. In fact, this raises the whole question of the serious commitment of this nation to equal opportunity in employment or elsewhere and is but one of numerous examples of laws which protect "the haves" as against "the have nots." Is it more serious if someone robs $50.00 (or whatever) from my purse or your wallet or, if others deprive whole groups of people of employment opportunity to even acquire and retain the discretionary $50.00? The negative sanctions applied for robbing or already acquired possessions contrasted with the slap on the wrist (if that) for systematically still excluding blacks and women (especially) from the chance to acquire equity must suggest we are a long distance from justice in social concept and the law. This brings me to my final recommendations: The EEOC has issued guidelines that state that: (1) Title VII supersedes state protective (so-called) laws and that (2) classified employment advertising segregated by sex without a proven bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) violates Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. I urge amendment of S. 2453 to make both of these guidelines specific sections of the law in unequivocal language so that newspapers be specifically named as subject to the jurisdiction of the law. The present typical sex segregated want ads represent a flagrant frustration of equal employment opportunity especially for women at their point of entry; it seriously blunts the aspirations of the young and irresponsibly denies employers the full range of pools from which to draw human resources. As women and men, we're perfectly able to define our own interests and preferences. In a day when overpopulation is of increasingly critical concern, we cannot encourage, and dare not countenance, parenthood as the chief occupation of one half the population and so sex stereotype roles as to absolve the other half from all but economic responsibility for that.

The recommendations for coverage to strengthen the EEOC and for programs to be shifted to the EEOC require the priorities, funds and quality of commitment to guarantee effective results. The legislation you recommend must include specific attention to effective fiscal and other behaviors.

Now, I note that my Senators: Hugh Scott and Richard Schweiker have both sponsored both Bills-S. 2806 and S. 2453. Since these bills are different in intent and probable effect, I would like to ask Senator Scott, who is not here, and Senator Schweiker of this Labor Subcommittee precisely and pointedly where they stand on Equal Employment Opportunity. Are they for both bills? Are they covering all options? Is this dual sponsorship window-dressing? More important than what they, or anyone else, sponsor is what they advocate regardless of political consequences. I have stated that S. 2453, with certain specific amendments and additions, is clearly preferable with provisions of S. 2806 to be available for discretionary use at the option of the EEOC.

As a constituent of Senators Scott and Schweiker with several different constituencies of my own relevant to social issues, I am frankly worried. Laws and practices in this achievement-oriented culture are still primarily decided by white men. Most of these white men have as their birthright the opportunities and

facilitating social system that still effectively excludes most blacks and most women from significant roles. Until middle-aged affluent white male-dominated America sees the outrageous incompatibility of a democracy with still present need of people like me to plead for my birthright along with my black brothers and sisters, citizen unrest will increase and multiply. Women's violence will be redirected from self-hate, husband-pressuring, and child-battering to changing the present inequitable system. Just as Black is Beautiful: Women are People. Please take Civil Rights Laws more seriously if you want order and justice in this land.

ACTION RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN AT THE FOURTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE, MARCH 20-22, 1970

HUMAN REPRODUCTION

The basic human right to limit one's own reproduction includes the right to all forms of birth control (contraception, including sterilization, and abortion), recognizing the dual responsibility of both sexes. We therefore oppose all legislation and practices that restrict access to any of these means of birth control, and advocate positive measures requiring:

That all public hospitals offer contraception, sterilization and abortion to anyone requesting these services.

That these services be made accessible to as many people as possible by the establishment of a network of local public clinics.

That the availability of these services be widely and continuously publicized. That public funds be allocated for research into new methods of contraception, sterilization and abortion which would increase their safety and availability. Women should be guaranteed their civil right to an abortion performed by any qualified person in any suitable setting. We urge the convening of regional conferences on the repeal of abortion laws.

CHILD CARE

Child care must become a political priority. We therefore propose a coalition of organizations representing all socio-economic, professional, educational, philanthropic organizations, etc. interested in the establishment of child care facilities in keeping with the National Organization for Women's goals. The purpose of this coalition would be to join together to exert pressure on the power structure in labor, industry, and government to immediately make available facilities, funds, etc. and to grant tax deductions for quality child care.

In order to make this NOW-sponsored coalition for child care a reality, we call upon the president, chairman of the board, vice presidents of legal, legislation, finance and public relations and the regional directors of the east, south, west and middle west, and chapter and child care committee chairmen to undertake this as an action project of major priority to be organized immediately.

We propose that the fourth annual conference adopt and send the following telegram to Congressman John Brademas (House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.): "The fourth annual conference of the National Organization for Women supports the philosophy behind the Brademas Bill No. HR13520 which addresses itself to child care facilities for children of all economic and social groups. [This was done.]

POLITICS AND LEGISLATION

NOW recognizes the need to act politically to achieve equal rights for women. We are non-partisan: we owe allegiance only to the cause of women's liberation, not to any political party, but we will work through existing political institutions to achieve our aims. We urge women to run for office from any political party and we will work for candidates who support and campaign for our goals.

We support the formation of women's rights caucuses within existing political parties and organizations and the establishment of independent women's political caucuses. These groups would seek out candidates to run for office in support of women's issues and would seek passage of legislation to further the cause of women's rights.

Even when election appears unlikely, NOW members should run for office to educate the public about our concerns. Local chapters should encourage women already active in politics to run on women's issues. Local chapters should set up committees to seek out candidates. Regional conferences should include workshops to train prospective candidates and campaign workers.

NOW urges all political parties to dissolve their women's divisions which have relegated women to servant roles in political life. Women should be included on all levels of party activity on an equal basis with men. In view of the fact that only 2 percent of all elected officials are women, we call on political parties to seek out and run women candidates who represent women's rights and needs.

NOW reaffirms its unalterable opposition to the confirmation of G. Harrold Carswell to the Supreme Court of the United States on the grounds of his sexist action in the Phillips vs. Martin-Marietta case. We understand that the President is committed to a balanced court, and we urge him to appoint a distinguished woman jurist to the present vacancy on the Supreme Court.

We support the New York City demonstration against Rep. Emanuel Cellar in Brooklyn May 9th to protest his opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment. If possible, the national NOW board meeting should be held in Washington, D.C. May 2-3, immediately before the hearings on the Equal Rights Amendment so that we can call attention to the hearings and urge that national attention be focused on the problems of women.

NOW officers and chapters should seek union support for our legislative goals and work to have unions insure equal rights for women on the job and within labor organizations.

National funds should be earmarked to hire a lobbyist to work on feminist issues in Washington, D.C.

We call a 24-hour general women's strike to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the day women won the right to vote. The strike would focus on the continuing oppression of women and signal the start of a major political effort for the liberation of women.

We advocate that sex discrimination be forbidden in employment, education, housing, public accommodations and government services and that NOW work to add this provision to all local and state laws where it does not appear. NOW should take affirmative action and should insure that enforcement agencies take affirmative action to carry out the law.

We advocate equalizing the legal position of women and men in regard to child care responsibilities, intestate succession and prostitution.

We support United Nations treaties promoting the progress of women, and advocate U.S. government sanctions against any country where women are not enfranchised.

Until our goal of dissolution of women's divisions is reached, we urge the women's divisions of the political parties to run women's candidates for office both within their party and at large.

We urge the Congress of the U.S. to allow Monica Morte and other women to be employed as pages.

EMPLOYMENT

I. Resolve to support and work for legislation to provide equal employment and business opportunities for all women.

We recognize that passage of the equal rights amendment would negate the need for much of this legislation.

Until the amendment is adopted, NOW must work aggressively to achieve the following:

1. The minimum wage act should cover all female employees.

2. All women employees should be covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

3. All titles in the Civil Rights Act should contain a provision to eliminate sex discrimination.

4. NOW chapters should institute fair employment practices laws in states where none exist and should work to strengthen those state laws now on the books. Only 22 states have such laws.

5. NOW declares support of the Senate bill S2454 to grant enforcement powers to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

6. NOW endorses Rep. Edith Green's bill HR 15971 and HR 16098 to amend the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act to require equal pay for equal work for female professional, executive or administrative positions.

7. We call upon the government to provide a more practical, realistic and effective way for all federal, state, city and/or public employees to have recourse for filing sex discrimination complaints in employment.

8. We urge repeal of state and local laws which deny women the same freedoms, conditions and privileges as men have for borrowing money, owning real estate and operating businesses.

9. NOW calls for repeal of all restrictive and protective legislation which discriminates against women and requests inclusion of men in all state protective

laws.

II. Resolve that NOW provide an affirmative action program to assist women in filing complaints on sex discrimination.

We recognize the need for all chapters to appoint an employment committee chairwoman to spearhead activities.

To assist the programs in each chapter, we offer:

1. New York Chapter employment action plan.

2. A fact sheet on filing a complaint for government and all other female employees and the operation of the EEOC which will be prepared by Eliza Pascal and sent to chapters and submitted to NOW ACTS.

3. We ask that NOW's board of directors appoint an employment coordinator, Aleta Styers, 820 Seward Street, Evanston, Illinois 60202 (Tel: 312-869-4694) who will disseminate information to chapters on the subject; prepare recommendations for actions; compile data on sex discrimination cases filed and won by women. We suggest that pertinent material be printed in NOW ACTS.

III. Resolve that chapters persist in NOW's goal to integrate all newspaper help wanted advertisements.

We recommend continued confrontation with newspaper publishers, picketing, filing complaints with local civil rights commisions. We would like to see a NOW chapter or member prove that a newspaper does exercise judgment in accepting and printing classified advertisements by trying to place a racist and sexist help wanted ad. We ask the board of directors to appoint a coordinator for this project and suggest Joy Sokeitous. Other ideas for chapters to pursue will be coordinated and communicated to NOW chapters by Joy Sokeitous, 1122 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

IV. Resolve to encourage and support women to be economically independent. We recommend the following chapter actions:

1. Offer career counseling to all women.

2. Encourage and support the formation of businesses for women and women in business.

3. Provide information on securing Small Business Administration loans and obtaining government contracts available to minority businesses.

4. Encourage and suggest procedures for women who wish to pool money to form economic co-ops for businesses, etc.

V. Resolve to make a commitment to help women in poverty.

We recommend that NOW chapters give their support and take action where possible to aid women in poverty. Areas of concern are given below:

1. Whereas we believe in the right of all sisters to employment; and whereas there are not enough jobs to go around; and whereas this situation is expected to worsen in the 1970's, be it resolved that we support a shortened work week which will open more jobs to women and allow men more time to spend in the home.

2. Be it resolved that we support full employment for our sisters and we believe that when the private economy cannot provide decent jobs, the public economy must.

3. Whereas over 10 percent of women are ill-fed because they are too poor, and whereas this organization is on record as bringing our sisters out of poverty; be it resolved that we look toward the future by supporting in principle a guaranteed income.

WAR

We resolve that NOW shall not take an official position on the Vietnam conflict, feeling that although war is abhorrent, we should not take a position upon this one conflict, since it is not specifically related to Women's Rights.

OVERCOMING SELF-DENIGRATION

We must develop a better means of reaching the many women who are victims of self-hatred. Our anger, so often directed at ourselves, must be focused where it belongs on the discriminatory laws, policies and attitudes of our society. We can help women to become aware of the need for feminism by approaching the factors that divide and immobilize women:

1. Failure to recognize our sisterhood.

2. Overcoming stereotypes and labels which have socialized us in a malechauvinist society.